This morning’s breakfast had two very interesting speakers: climate skeptic Congressman Tom McClintock from California and Canadian author, columnist and environmentalist Lawrence Solomon. Solomon is a founder and managing director of the Energy Probe Research Foundation and is a strong advocate of renewable energy and written a book against urban sprawl.
When Congressman McClintock addressed the audience he emphasized that the actual threat of global warming is a big one, but not because of temperature and more so because of what the radical environmentalist movement can do to control the message and hurt the economy. He discussed the detrimental economic and environmental effects that the state’s ethanol policy had on California and warned that California should not be the model for the rest of the country.
People love to watch events in California – in much the same way that people love to gawk at car wrecks. You feel guilty about it, of course, and you know you shouldn’t stare, but you just can’t help yourselves. But you do anyway and there’s at least a respectable reason for it. When you drive by that wreck, you can tell your children, ‘Kids, that’s what happens when you don’t pay attention when you drive.’ And California’s wreck is a good time to remind voters, ‘Kids, that’s what happens when you don’t pay attention when you vote.”
The quote drew a resounding applause.
Solomon, a man of sincere intellectual integrity, noted that the environmentalist radicals in the global warming movement are starting to fear that they will lose all credibility under a bunch of scenarios. 1.) We will enter a period of global cooling. 2.) People will not stand for the economic effects of a carbon tax. 3.) There will be rolling brown outs and black outs as a result of inefficient electricity supply coming from wind and solar energy. Just as a reminder, this is coming from an environmentalist in support of renewable technology.
Perhaps the most intriguing part of Soloman’s speech was his telling stories of the damage international carbon reducing plans are doing to the developing world. Rather than reducing carbon-generating sources of energy at home, many developed countries are buying carbon credits from hydro dams. These governments will displace citizens from their homes without much warning or compensation.
See, for instance, this January story by Joe McDonald and Charles J. Hanley, Associated Press writers:
“The hydroelectric dam, a low wall of concrete slicing across an old farming valley, is supposed to help a power company in distant Germany contribute to saving the climate – while putting lucrative “carbon credits” into the pockets of Chinese developers.
But in the end the new Xiaoxi dam may do nothing to lower global-warming emissions as advertised. And many of the 7,500 people displaced by the project still seethe over losing their homes and farmland.
‘Nobody asked if we wanted to move,” said a 38-year-old man whose family lost a small brick house. ‘The government just posted a notice that said, ‘Your home will be demolished.’”
Now, just imagine if we ask these developing nations to cut their own emissions. Carbon trading schemes among the developing world is already hurting these countries. A global plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will de-develop the developed world and halt and reverse any economic progress made by the developing world.
That should certainly open up some eyes and ears of politicians.